5 ms·

Since I happen to know the founder of Euclideon and the company a little bit I have to emphasize here that their tech was and is real. Sure in the videos it was

by rsp1984 11y ago

Since I happen to know the founder of Euclideon and the company a little bit I have to emphasize here that their tech was and is real. Sure in the videos it wasn't presented in a neutral academic setting but it's far from rigged and in fact is being used in the geospatial industry today. Voxelquests technology looks very promising too and I am looking forward to seeing this applied in a game setting.

M4v3R 11y ago
For those who didn't seen it - Euclideon released a new video about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvCxa9Y9NU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvCxa9Y9NU
- anc84 11y ago
  "Euclideon Makes World’s Most Realistic Graphics" Yeah, honest and humble as always. I wonder how the people who actually developed the algorithms and procedures they used about this.
  - threeseed 11y ago
    The same way everyone in any industry takes credit for work done by other people. And it's just product marketing. Most of the world aren't engineers. Boring them with technologies and specifics isn't how you sell products.
    - CyberDildonics 11y ago
      It isn't 'just product marketing' Their videos are ridiculous and prey upon people not being able to identify what they aren't seeing. They made grandiose claims and diverted attention to things that didn't matter. How many games are using what they've done?
      - threeseed 11y ago
        It seemed pretty clear that they were more interested in geospatial, real estate etc industries. Gaming is not even a sensible industry to break into given how fundamentally different the workflow would be to use this technology. And sure it was a little over the top but then again so is most marketing.
        Mithaldu 11y ago
        > Gaming is not even They claimed themselves that two games are being made with their engine.
        CyberDildonics 11y ago
        That is 100% not true, their videos were of them running around in video game engines and pointing at low poly trees!
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  That video is actively deceptive in at least one point: He starts out explaining that current engines lack realistic lighting. Then he shows scenes with realistic lighting. He fails to mention that current engines create lighting from mathematical formulas and can be changed easily and on the fly. In fact for many of them it's entirely possible to change the day time in realtime, resulting in changes of lighting direction, intensity, color. Meanwhile the Euclideon lighting looks realistic because it's rendering camera-recorded images onto voxels, which also means that the lighting cannot be changed at all. It's a static snapshot. In order to get different lighting into the scenes he's shown they'd need to do a different recording at another time of day, and of course completely arbitrary lighting is impossible at anything near that level of quality.
- hackcasual 11y ago
  As soon as he said, "These are images of the real world", I immediately thought they just looked like high quality renders. Wonder if there's a kickstarter in their future?
  - aw3c2 11y ago
    It's nothing new. Textured 3D point clouds are a vast topic with huge amounts of research. Euclideon just successfully markets hype to rich people and seems able to write software less sucky than the existing solutions.
    - hackcasual 11y ago
      Oh, I know that, something about how this is all presented just rubs me the wrong way. I feel like the videos about it mis-state critics objections. Instead of "critics have pointed out that this involves massive amounts of memory and that arbitrary and complex animations will likely cause problems" it's just "critics said it couldn't be done". Also, the talking about investors at the end there rang alarm bells for me.
jerf 11y ago
Nobody who knows what they are talking about has ever claimed Euclideon's tech isn't real. What those people have said is that A: it isn't revolutionary because B: it's pretty obviously simply an implementation of a well-known technique with C: well known and quite significant limitations that constrain it to a very small useful space which is the reason the many, many people who know and understand the technique quite well tend not to use it for anything and D: not even a shred of evidence that they have overcome the limitations of the technique. And E: as a consequence of A-D the verbiages constantly pumped out by the company is grossly overstated to the point of either just riding the line of fraudulent, or crossing it. Particularly as the constraints of the technology generally precluded it from being useful in the fields they claimed it would be useful in. Using it for sort of 3D photos of real-life spaces isn't a bad use, and I have no problem believing it's a real application of the tech. However C and D above remain in full force.

by rsp1984 11y ago

M4v3R 11y ago

For those who didn't seen it - Euclideon released a new video about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvCxa9Y9NU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvCxa9Y9NU

anc84 11y ago
"Euclideon Makes World’s Most Realistic Graphics" Yeah, honest and humble as always. I wonder how the people who actually developed the algorithms and procedures they used about this.
- threeseed 11y ago
  The same way everyone in any industry takes credit for work done by other people. And it's just product marketing. Most of the world aren't engineers. Boring them with technologies and specifics isn't how you sell products.
  - CyberDildonics 11y ago
    It isn't 'just product marketing' Their videos are ridiculous and prey upon people not being able to identify what they aren't seeing. They made grandiose claims and diverted attention to things that didn't matter. How many games are using what they've done?
    - threeseed 11y ago
      It seemed pretty clear that they were more interested in geospatial, real estate etc industries. Gaming is not even a sensible industry to break into given how fundamentally different the workflow would be to use this technology. And sure it was a little over the top but then again so is most marketing.
      - Mithaldu 11y ago
        > Gaming is not even They claimed themselves that two games are being made with their engine.
      - CyberDildonics 11y ago
        That is 100% not true, their videos were of them running around in video game engines and pointing at low poly trees!
Mithaldu 11y ago
That video is actively deceptive in at least one point: He starts out explaining that current engines lack realistic lighting. Then he shows scenes with realistic lighting. He fails to mention that current engines create lighting from mathematical formulas and can be changed easily and on the fly. In fact for many of them it's entirely possible to change the day time in realtime, resulting in changes of lighting direction, intensity, color. Meanwhile the Euclideon lighting looks realistic because it's rendering camera-recorded images onto voxels, which also means that the lighting cannot be changed at all. It's a static snapshot. In order to get different lighting into the scenes he's shown they'd need to do a different recording at another time of day, and of course completely arbitrary lighting is impossible at anything near that level of quality.
hackcasual 11y ago
As soon as he said, "These are images of the real world", I immediately thought they just looked like high quality renders. Wonder if there's a kickstarter in their future?
- aw3c2 11y ago
  It's nothing new. Textured 3D point clouds are a vast topic with huge amounts of research. Euclideon just successfully markets hype to rich people and seems able to write software less sucky than the existing solutions.
  - hackcasual 11y ago
    Oh, I know that, something about how this is all presented just rubs me the wrong way. I feel like the videos about it mis-state critics objections. Instead of "critics have pointed out that this involves massive amounts of memory and that arbitrary and complex animations will likely cause problems" it's just "critics said it couldn't be done". Also, the talking about investors at the end there rang alarm bells for me.

jerf 11y ago

Nobody who knows what they are talking about has ever claimed Euclideon's tech isn't real. What those people have said is that A: it isn't revolutionary because B: it's pretty obviously simply an implementation of a well-known technique with C: well known and quite significant limitations that constrain it to a very small useful space which is the reason the many, many people who know and understand the technique quite well tend not to use it for anything and D: not even a shred of evidence that they have overcome the limitations of the technique. And E: as a consequence of A-D the verbiages constantly pumped out by the company is grossly overstated to the point of either just riding the line of fraudulent, or crossing it. Particularly as the constraints of the technology generally precluded it from being useful in the fields they claimed it would be useful in. Using it for sort of 3D photos of real-life spaces isn't a bad use, and I have no problem believing it's a real application of the tech. However C and D above remain in full force.